3 ms·

I think it’s reasonably obvious that the tech could have a lot of potential, but that’s yet to be realised. Chatbot interfaces are so primitive and clearly not

I think it’s reasonably obvious that the tech could have a lot of potential, but that’s yet to be realised. Chatbot interfaces are so primitive and clearly not the final form for LLMs, but people have to invent that. But, tech being impactful doesn’t mean it will create and deliver value for others.

falcor84 2y ago
Can you come up with an example of tech that was impactful without delivering value to others? The closest I can think of would be the atom bomb, but even that arguably brought significant value in terms of relative geopolitical stability.
- madeofpalk 2y ago
  Sorry, I phrased it poorly. Very often technology advancements redistribute value, taking it away from many people and allowing companies to capture more profit and/or lower costs. Such as self-serve checkouts at supermarkets leading to less cashier jobs. > A huge amount of economic value is going to be created by AI. Company builders focused on delivering value to end users will be rewarded handsomely. Companies will acrue value, but 'common folk' will lose it.
  - falcor84 2y ago
    Self-serve checkout is an interesting example. Even though it can have its issues, I personally quite like being able to move through checkout more quickly, without having to interact with the cashier and the people in line in front of me (assuming enough self-serve stations). I haven't analyzed its economics, but I would assume that by reducing the cashier jobs (e.g. allowing 1 operator to manage 8 self-serve checkout stations), supermarkets reduce their overall operating costs, and then use that to reduce their prices (and if they won't their competitors will), leading to a benefit to us 'common folk'. As for cashier jobs, I don't think there's anything inherently good about them or inherently bad about them disappearing from the economy. As another example, I don't know many people who miss the Elevator Operators[0], and it makes perfect sense for us to press the buttons ourselves. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_operator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_operator
    - TeMPOraL 2y ago
      > I would assume that by reducing the cashier jobs (e.g. allowing 1 operator to manage 8 self-serve checkout stations), supermarkets reduce their overall operating costs Unfortunately, what reduces the operating costs even more is giving the job of managing 8 self-serve checkouts to existing employee, on top of their current workload. With reliability of the checkout machines being as bad as it is, this results in a very frustrating shopping experience. This is a pattern that we can see happening in everywhere across every sector in the market: the price for the buyer may get lower, but so does the quality. Often enough, it's impossible to retain quality and stay profitable, so the whole product or service class suddenly becomes worse. In the end, the delta between current satisfaction and the minimum satisfaction below which the customer would bounce, is a profit margin being extracted when competitive pressure is high - which, I dare say, sucks for the customer, even if they also get stuff cheaper.

falcor84 2y ago

Can you come up with an example of tech that was impactful without delivering value to others? The closest I can think of would be the atom bomb, but even that arguably brought significant value in terms of relative geopolitical stability.

madeofpalk 2y ago
Sorry, I phrased it poorly. Very often technology advancements redistribute value, taking it away from many people and allowing companies to capture more profit and/or lower costs. Such as self-serve checkouts at supermarkets leading to less cashier jobs. > A huge amount of economic value is going to be created by AI. Company builders focused on delivering value to end users will be rewarded handsomely. Companies will acrue value, but 'common folk' will lose it.
- falcor84 2y ago
  Self-serve checkout is an interesting example. Even though it can have its issues, I personally quite like being able to move through checkout more quickly, without having to interact with the cashier and the people in line in front of me (assuming enough self-serve stations). I haven't analyzed its economics, but I would assume that by reducing the cashier jobs (e.g. allowing 1 operator to manage 8 self-serve checkout stations), supermarkets reduce their overall operating costs, and then use that to reduce their prices (and if they won't their competitors will), leading to a benefit to us 'common folk'. As for cashier jobs, I don't think there's anything inherently good about them or inherently bad about them disappearing from the economy. As another example, I don't know many people who miss the Elevator Operators[0], and it makes perfect sense for us to press the buttons ourselves. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_operator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elevator_operator
  - TeMPOraL 2y ago
    > I would assume that by reducing the cashier jobs (e.g. allowing 1 operator to manage 8 self-serve checkout stations), supermarkets reduce their overall operating costs Unfortunately, what reduces the operating costs even more is giving the job of managing 8 self-serve checkouts to existing employee, on top of their current workload. With reliability of the checkout machines being as bad as it is, this results in a very frustrating shopping experience. This is a pattern that we can see happening in everywhere across every sector in the market: the price for the buyer may get lower, but so does the quality. Often enough, it's impossible to retain quality and stay profitable, so the whole product or service class suddenly becomes worse. In the end, the delta between current satisfaction and the minimum satisfaction below which the customer would bounce, is a profit margin being extracted when competitive pressure is high - which, I dare say, sucks for the customer, even if they also get stuff cheaper.